Familial relationships of the monocot order Liliales based on a molecular phylogenetic analysis using four plastid loci:matK,rbcL,atpBandatpF-H

Abstract

Many molecular studies have shown the monocot order Liliales to be well supported; morphologically, it is defined by synapomorphies of tepalar nectaries and extrorse anthers, in contrast with septal nectaries and introrse anthers commonly found in other monocots, especially Asparagales, with which it was often confused in the past. It comprises c. 1500 species, 67 genera and 9–11 families. Although monophyly is clear, the phylogenetic relationships among some of the families are still unclear. In this study, we examine the inter‐ and infrafamilial relationships among Liliales in phylogenetic analyses based on four plastid loci (matK, rbcL, atpB and atpF‐H). We performed phylogenetic analyses and constructed maximum parsimony and Bayesian trees for 49 genera and 148 taxa in ten families of Liliales sensu Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (APG) III using the combined DNA data. The monophyly of Liliales, except for Corsiaceae (Arachnitis), was strongly supported by both analyses. Campynemataceae were sister to the rest of the order, excluding Corsiaceae. The other families formed two well‐defined clades, (Colchicaceae + Alstroemeriaceae) and (Liliaceae, Smilacaceae, (Rhipogonaceae + Philesiaceae)), and one weakly supported clade with Melanthiaceae and Petermanniaceae. Subfamilial and tribal circumscriptions for the three larger families, Colchicaceae, Melanthiaceae and Liliaceae, agreed well with the results of this study, except for the subfamily Calochortoideae of Liliaceae, which was split into two separate clades of Calochortus and Tricyrtis. In addition, we found several taxa with a 10‐bp inversion in matK, which could contribute additional homoplasy to these analyses if included without re‐coding. Phylogenetic relationships among families of Liliales were better defined here than in a previous molecular analysis, although the placement of Corsiaceae with plastid data remains problematic. Based on these results, reconsideration of the circumscriptions of Rhipogonaceae + Philesiaceae and the subfamilial circumscription for Calochortoideae of Liliaceae is suggested. © 2013 The Linnean Society of London

A morphometric study and taxonomic revision of Fritillaria tubaeformis complex (Liliaceae)

“…The tribe Lilieae is sister to Tulipeae (Chase et al 1995;Patterson andGivnish 2002, Fay et al 2006;Kim et al 2013;Petersen et al 2013), and the phylogenetic relationships among the large genera Fritillaria and Lilium were investigated by Rønsted et al (2005). Studies more focused on Fritillaria were published by Türktaş et al (2012), Day et al (2014) and Kelly et al (2015).…”

Pollen Structure and Diversity in Liliales

“…Inaperturate Liliales include Campynemanthe, Chamaelirium, Chionographis (or porate), Trillium, Clintonia (or weakly monosulcate), Smilax, and Philesiaceae. Inapertur- ate pollen therefore occurs in two of the three major clades of Liliales identified by molecular analyses (Kim et al 2013;Petersen et al 2013). This character could indicate a close relationship between Chamaelirium, Chionographis, and Trillium.…”

“…Sometimes endexine is present, though it may be absent. In some taxa, the exine is reduced to granules or echini resting on a lamellated Kim et al (2013), Mennes et al (2013Mennes et al ( , 2015, and Petersen et al (2013). Campynemataceae and Corsiaceae are shown as forming a clade that is sister to all other Liliales.…”

“…The remaining members of Liliales are placed in three clades ( fig. 1): (1) Alstroemeriaceae (including Luzuriagaceae) and Colchicaceae; (2) Liliaceae, Philesiaceae, Rhipogonaceae, and Smilacaceae; and (3) Melanthiaceae (including Trilliaceae; Kim et al 2013;Petersen et al 2013). The wild card family Petermanniaceae has been placed variously either as sister to Melanthiaceae (Kim et al 2013) or sister to the clade containing Alstroemeriaceae and Colchicaceae (Petersen et al 2013), so its relationships remain unresolved.…”

Persicaria Amphibia, a Serious Terrestrial Weed in Northern Greece: A Combined Molecular and Morphological Approach to Identification and Taxonomy

“…Four main suggestions for a plant barcode have been proposed for the suitability of various coding and non-coding cpDNA markers ( 11,25). These are rpoC 1 +rpoB+matK or rpoC 1 +matK +trnH-psbA (5), rbcL+trnH-psbA (24) and atpF-H+psbKJ psbKJ+ matK (21 ). However, Lahaye et al (27) proposed that matK alone should constitute the plant barcode.…”